Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

Pyramid Shaped Keyboard 242

Posted by CmdrTaco from the hey-why-not dept.
Lordkolya wrote in to tell us about a pyramid shaped keyboard. It's supposed to be ergonomic, but it sure is ugly. I still need to try one of the Kinesis keyboards out. It's time for me to change keyboards again. I dunno if I can learn a new chording keyboard. I've tried a few one handed boards and had bad luck. Maybe I'm not destined to learn any more chords then E-A-D.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pyramid Shaped Keyboard More

Pyramid Shaped Keyboard

Comments Filter:
  • I'd much rather have the Zero Gum laser than a pyramid keyboard.
  • Did you see the rest of the stuff on that site? Melting gum off the road with high powered lasers, optical spy doohickies and much much more. And their poll is much more clueful than the past two or three I've seen here! I'm bookmarking those guys oh yeah!
    • The methodology and remarkable benefits are itemized in the patent. Remarkably, those 24 selections constitute 99.5% of the typing in typical English text ... Since one cannot see the keys inside the cavities, their character assignments can be reassigned for optimum alphabet distribution in any language with up to 48 characters and punctuation marks.

      As the grammar nazi, let me be the first to point out that the English language commonly uses more than 24 characters. Let's see, in this single sentence, I used 22 different characters. That's close to the maximum already, in one sentence. Each character represents more than 0.5% in that sentence as well.

      Finally, this isn't a grammar note, rather a progression analysis... Notice that "Since one cannot see the keys inside the cavities, their character assignments can be reassigned for optimum alphabet distribution..." Right. I clearly understand how invisible keys can be assigned for optimum alphabet distribution.

      The sales lingo on this site rivals X10.com [x10.com] in uselessness and doublespeak. I'd beware of a SPAM mail attack if were you and you were thinking about purchasing one of these.

      • As the grammar nazi, let me be the first to point out that the English language commonly uses more than 24 characters. Let's see, in this single sentence, I used 22 different characters.

        I'm not sure exactly what your point is. The guy is saying that the 24 selections occur with enough freqency so that they comprise 99.5% of the typing you do. I haven't done that bath, but on the face of it, I don't have any trouble accepting the notion that you can sum up 99.5% of all your typed characters in 24 keys: including the spaces, commas, and period, the sentence you picked as an example contained 119 characters, of which fully 32 were lowercase vowels. 22 were spaces. So, 54 of the characters in the sentence (close to half) were one of six characters.

        Right. I clearly understand how invisible keys can be assigned for optimum alphabet distribution.

        Meaning, the keys aren't labeled, so re-mapping the character set doesn't result in a conflict with the labels.

        I'm all for being skeptical of these claims, but be reasonable, too.


        • I haven't done that bath


          Whoops. Haven't done that math. I have a cold.

          • 26 letters in the English Alphabet
          • Chances are, most of your sentences don't use z, x or q. We're down to 23.
          • Add space, return, and shift - we're back up to 26, but I'd imagine at least 90-95% of typing would invole the keys we have. I'm sure there's at least a couple letters that could be statistically removed, but I don't have the info handy (or the time to write a character-frequency checking perl script to run a few texts through right now).


          His statistics don't seem too out of line...in fact, you could probably remove shift and return from my example above -- most sentences only have one capital letter, and one CR. That would make a reasonable 24, IMHO, although since I can't touch-type, not being able to see the keys would be counterproductive for me =)
      • They also use the (non) word "orientate" in their description.

        I hate that almost as much as "that being said."
  • I am weary of any keyboard that completely changes the layout that most are accustomed to..

    I have tried many keyboards but I have found that any keyboard that is supposedly better for your wrists actually causes me immense pain for several days (long enough to have me cease its use).

    I am currently using a MS keyboard of some sort that has one of those wrist rests. It works fine. My main problem is that I keep breaking the metal folding chairs that are inexpensive enough for me to afford and I have to keep reverting to a footstool w/a pillow on it for my desk. It is very low and doesn't really make the angle of the wrists very good.

    The other keys that must be reached by your thumbs on this pyramid thing would actually be a bigger pain in the ass than they are worth.

    I guess I will continue to type the old fashioned way. Hell, I still prefer standard transmissions, regular phones, and non-power anything.
    • A couple points:

      1. I'm a "starving college student," but I plunked down $150 for a leather chair from Office Depot. It is *definitely* worth it--it is super comfortable. I figure, any component like a chair you sit on all day, or a monitor you stare at all day (100 Hz refresh, baby!) is worth spending extra for. Your body is worth more than a few bucks, right?

      2. I agree that most of these keyboards are gimmicks. But I love split keyboards. I bought an I-MMT basic split keyboard (no annoying Internet function keys) for $40 a few years ago. Now I'm looking at a basic split-key from Belkin at $22. My arms always feel scrunched up when I type on keyboards without a split.

      Regards.

      • I'm still waiting for the nanonic clear fingernail paint with radio transmitters so I can type without a keyboard.

        do rant
        {
        But I'd settle for a wireless split style model with wireless optical mouse from Logitech, if they'd just make the damn things. What's up with that anyhow? You can buy a wireless optical mouse, a wireless keyboard/mouse combo, but no wireless/optical mouse combo.;
        return 0;
        }
      • Comfort is a good thing when you're trying to use a computer all day long. For some reason, I love my 7 year old "Packard Bell" keyboard. I just haven't found anything that replaces the feel. But, while we're on the issue of comfort:

        1. Mouse. Get a mouse that works for you. Try them, there is no secret. I'm happy with my Logitech MouseMan Wheel Optical. Unfortunately, they don't make them for left handed people (I'm not one, but this may be a problem).

        2. Monitor. Many people don't get a good monitor. They get the cheap no-brand things. My all means, get a good monitor. In case you haven't noticed, you spend most of your computer time looking at your monitor. Go for flat (LCD if you like it, but flat CRT is great - and cheaper). I personaly like my 19 inch Sony FD Trinitron G400. Flat. Crisp. 2 inputs. Great refresh rate support. Bright. 3 year warranty.

        3. A comfortable chair. This is really personal, but a get a chair designed for sitting, not a lounge chair. A good sitting chair often costs less than an executive chair.

    • I guess I will continue to type the old fashioned way. Hell, I still prefer standard transmissions...

      Standard tranmissions aren't old fashioned... they're fun, and give you a level of control you can't find in any traditional automatic. The newer BMW/Ferrari style SMG gearboxes may change that opinion in me, but I can't afford one yet so I'll stick with my clutch and 5-speed.

      ...regular phones...

      Come on man, THAT'S old fashioned. :)
    • I'm just guessing here - but I would say that if you're serious about your description of your work area, then that's a large source of your wrist pain.

      Here are a couple of links describing a good workstation:
      cornell ergo [cornell.edu]
      east carolina u [ecu.edu]

      I just got a new job, and I have a very nice workstation - which itself aleviated most of my typing-related pain problems. Aside from my desk, which has a seperate keyboard tray part that I can angle away from myself - my Aeron chair is quite comfy.

      I also recently purchased a Kinesis. I adapted quickly, and am not experiencing anywhere near as much strain. Combined with the new workstation, I almost don't have any pain. If I could only get away from the mouse more...

      My only two gripes with the Kinesis are that I often overshoot when going for c,v,n & m because they require so little motion to reach (which is really a feature of the board), and Ctrl and Alt could be a bit closer to my thumbs.

      As for this newfangled pyramid thing - I don't know. I never imagined that sideways motion was a Good Thing; this thing reminds me of the DataHand.
  • I mean seriously?

    I've spent my entire life on QWERTY. I type pretty well, and it works just fine.

    Tried an alternate once... and never again.

    I don't think QWERTY will ever be replaced.
    • I was a fast 2 finger person. But now I can touch type using the Dvorak layout. I don't have the stress. Besides qwerty was designed to SLOV a person down so the mechinical arms would not hit. Who carse about that now, but we still teach the old system as opposed to changing over to the new system. All this is really moot as voice recognition keeps getting better and better.

      • Re:I Love Dvorak (Score:2, Interesting)

        by dw ( 5168 )
        My biggest problem with dvorak is that the punctuation seems to be in UNIX unfriendly locations, as it is with qwerty but I find it really difficult to make the jump to a new layout when you fumble at the command line, so I tried my hand at designing a layout for the UNIX/programmer type:

        pic [208.20.194.110]
        xmodmap [208.20.194.110]

      • Besides qwerty was designed to [slow] a person down so the mechinical arms would not hit.

        I've heard this argument before (article about DVORAK I believe), and I'm pretty sure it's bogus. The keys may have been strategically placed so the more common two-key combinations are more likely to be separated, but it wasn't to slow the typist down.

        At any rate, I'm probably the only one, but I love a standard QWERTY keyboard. Tried a split keyboard once (MS "natural"), couldn't stand it. I don't hit all keys with the proper finger (namely, the "B" threw me off). DVORAK was a nightmare, tried it for about two days. Maybe I don't have the patience, maybe I'm stubborn, but I'm happy enough at 70 WPM -- not the fastest, but fast enough for me.
        • I've heard this argument

          Its not an argument. Its the reason behind the QWERTY design. Its not like they just put the keys were just thrown on a table and some guy said "this is how it will be laid out." Call that fact an argument is like saying "well, we made the tires on a car round because rubber comes in circles."

          Tried a split keyboard once (MS "natural"), couldn't stand it.

          I was kind of shocked when I read the email and it said that only 10% of the world is actual touch typist. Comments like this prove the guy right though. In general I have found people that can not use or do not like to use split keyboards are people who can't type correctly.
          • Its not an argument. Its the reason...

            The reason I call it an argument is that I find many different "reasons" why QUERTY was invented/adopted. A google search turns up many theories [earthlink.net] about this... the one I link to is the one I hear the most, but on the same site are some myths [earthlink.net], including the "slow typists down" and some others I've heard in the past. I tend to agree with the first one, the one I hinted at in my first post, that it was done to keep certain common letter combinations physically separated helping to avoid jamming in typewriters.

            In general I have found people that can not use or do not like to use split keyboards are people who can't type correctly.

            As I said, I know I don't type "correctly", but I do touch-type (eg, I don't look at the keyboard). I do use the wrong fingers for certain keys, which means using a split keyboard involves a bit of work on my part. As I mentioned earlier, I'm either stubborn or have no patience (or probably just plain lazy).

          • Its not an argument. Its the reason behind the QWERTY design. Its not like they just put the keys were just thrown on a table and some guy said "this is how it will be laid out." Call that fact an argument is like saying "well, we made the tires on a car round because rubber comes in circles."

            It's not an argument. It's an urban legend [urbanlegends.com] .

            The QWERTY keyboard was not in any way designed to slow down your typing, but it was designed to make it less likely that any 2 letters typed would be adjacent to each other on the keyboard. The problems with keyboard jamming happened to be when the typist typed 2 key's adjacent on the keyboard in rapid succession. Instead of designing a slower keyboard, it was decided to design a keyboard that would have commonly used successive keys spread apart on the keyboard.

            The sick sad reality is there is no better keyboard design in the world than QWERTY. There may be keyboard designs that are equal in convience as the QWERTY keyboard (like the Dvorak), but no keyboard offers such grand improvments that it's worth changing the current huge install base of keyboards (not to mention the logistics and lost time of retraining everyone).

            Now, inevitably a vehement Dvorak enthusiast will reply and tell me how poor the QWERTY design is at keeping adjacent keys from being typed. I will respond in advance by saying: I never said the QWERTY keyboard was perfect at what it was designed to do, however, there is no longer a need to worry about keyboard jamming, so the question still remains.. Why go through a massive change?
    • I have to admit, I just didn't have the patience to give Dvorak a chance.

      I figured I could work well with Qwerty, so why force myself to adapt to another style whose benefits would be questionable (again, since I'm just used to Qwerty).

      Current user adaption (or more to the point, the fact the majority simply won't change) is what pretty much kills the chances of keyboard alternatives being accepted.
    • alot of it depends on what you are used to

      although I can see this being more useful in zero g space, like the space shuttle, rather that the standard keyboard. Then it could also double as the head for a two fisted joystick for piloting.

      ;-)

  • hmm, well, the way I see it, those three chords were good enough for the Troggs so they're good enough for me.
    • I strongly advise learning C, F, and G also. A minor comes in handy as well.

      That's C the triad, not the programming language. Whose stuff from the Seattle area do you like better, The Ventures, or Microsoft? Hmm?

      • yeah, and root 5s for those cheesy punk tunes. I spend most of my time these days studying the texas shuffle stuff though as well as anything by john lee hooker and elmore james. 12/8 time rocks, it's so much more fun than 4/4.

  • Alternative uses for chorded keyboards (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 4n0nym0u53 C0w4rd ( 463592 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @09:31PM (#2339435) Homepage
    When he demonstrated the orginal computer mouse, Doug Engelbart used a one handed chorded keyboard for his left hand at the same time. The system that they developed allowed users to type all characters using just the chords on the left hand, but they still had a normal keyboard... Why? Because the standard keyboard was pretty efficient. So, what did they use the chorded keyboard for? Functions. Copy, paste, print, etc were all associated with chord combinations. This way, you move your hands away from the keyboard to use the mouse and chord when you want to do functional stuff. But, when you're typing you put both hands on the keyboard and pound away.

    The learning curve for a two-handed chorded keyboard is sort of long, but not rediculous. Learning a new layout (e.g., Dvorak) on a standard keyboard takes about 20 hours (e.g., 1 hour a day every weekday for a month). Chording is a learned skill, which can be acquired relatively quickly. I'm guessing it's faster if you have piano skills...

    • Re:Alternative uses for chorded keyboards (Score:5, Funny)

      by dboyles ( 65512 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:38PM (#2339617) Homepage
      When he demonstrated the orginal computer mouse, Doug Engelbart used a one handed chorded keyboard for his left hand at the same time. The system that they developed allowed users to type all characters using just the chords on the left hand...

      Must... resist... urge... to... make... immature... comment... about... one-handed... keyboarding...
    • Learning a new layout (e.g., Dvorak) on a standard keyboard takes about 20 hours (e.g., 1 hour a day every weekday for a month).

      It only took you 20 hours to learn Dvorak? Maybe I should start trying to learn it again.

    • Rule number one:

      never force a customer to change his habits

      This product will fail, and they will go broke.
      (some other far superior products that failed because they were too different:
      - sinclair's horizontal bicycle that was safer and made more efficient use of your muscle power, but made you look like a martian
      - omo power laundry detergent that cleaned your clothers efficiently at room temperature, but turned out to dissolve clothes, because people insisted on washing at 60 degrees C like they always had)
      • Omo detergent is also a mediocre laundry detergent [ninemsn.com.au], and I think most people would rather prefer not dissolving their clothes if they accidentally set the knob on "hot".

        Was that bike ever more than just vapor and lab prototypes?

        Don't forget that there are a lot of ways a product can fail, and you can't rely on the inventer or marketer to give you the whole story. In fact the state reason that a product failed is usually not the real reason it failed in my experiance. Also, beware of one sided marketing, something can have all of the greatest features in the world, but if it kills you 1 out of every 10 times you use it, nobody is going to use it.
    • I realize that, using chords, you can get more functions into one hand without forcing the user to look at the keyboard than you can with a standard keyboard. . . but you can still do it with a QWERTY (or similar style of keyboard, regardless of key layout) keyboard. I use Blender, and they did a good job of making sure all the hotkeys were within easy reach of my left hand's fingertips. If people were willing to use hotkeys optimized for position rather than mnemonic(sp) value, we could get the best of both worlds.

  • QWERTY myth repeated (Score:2, Informative)

    by Repton ( 60818 )

    His credibility does take a hit, though, in that he repeats the myth [earthlink.net] that the QWERTY keyboard was designed to slow typists down...

    • A dodgy looking page on earthlink, with no real references to back up its claims does not a mythbuster make...
      • A dodgy looking page on earthlink, with no real references to back up its claims does not a mythbuster make...

        The Straight Dope [straightdope.com] also addressed [straightdope.com] this story back in 1981. Cecil initially confirmed it, but then reversed himself when a reader sent in a well-researched article [utdallas.edu] which showed that the QWERTY design was indeed intended to increase typing speed, not decrease it.

        It also has a bit to say about the supposed advantages of Dvorak keyboards.

    • Oldest tech flame war (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MarkusQ ( 450076 )
      This is a tech flame war so old, it predates the term "flame war." There have been a number of books written on the subject, and (perhaps typicaly of flame wars) both sides frequently make claims that are clearly false (e.g. QWERTY puts commonly used characters under strong fingers, and frequent pairs far apart; QWERTY was designed to slow typists down).

      The truth isn't hard to see under the FUD: the QWERTY layout was designed to speed typists on the original machine by reducing the frequency of jams. It did this at some cost (of the most frequently used keys, ETAION, only one (A) is on the home row, and that under the left pinky, arguably the weakest finger). It was a reasonable tradeoff at the time but became a standard, with all the attendent entrenched opposition to change. This is where the FUD starts to come in. Dvorak et al overstated the advantages of their alternatives, and this gave the established manufacturers enough room to "debunk" their claims, launching hundred years of bickering.

      -- MarkusQ

    • Yeah - I stopped reading at that point. It's hard to believe that someone who allegedly put so much work into keyboard research is willing to say that on the record.

      Maybe not, if he thinks he can get away with it.

  • wouldn't work (Score:3, Insightful)

    by crayz ( 1056 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @09:34PM (#2339444) Homepage
    On a normal keyboard, I usually leave one hand on the keyboard at all times when using the mouse. This hand can hit all the modifier keys(control, option, commands, shift - on a Mac), for when pressing those keys is necessary in what you're doing with the mouse.

    With this keyboard it's designed so the modifier keys are split between both hands. So when your right hand goes to the mouse, it becomes difficult to hit the modifier keys with the left.

    Also, say what you want about flat keyboards, but being able to rest your hands on the desk or wrist pad is nice. Do you really want to be holding your arms up in the air for hours on end while typing?
    • "On a normal keyboard, I usually leave one hand on the keyboard at all times when using the mouse."


      Hmmmm.... At all times? I think not ;-)
    • That's all I'm sayin'. [tuxedo.org]

      Hey, what's the "postercomment compression filter"? I violated it prior to adding this useless text.

    • Lets see. Rest your arms on your chair armrests and relax your whole forearm and hands. Are your hands horizontal? Probably not. More likely somewhere between 45% and vertical. So how can you say forcing your hands to fit a flat KB is natural or painless?

      On the other hand, having both hands so close together doesn't seem too comfy. But I guess you can't have a great big block in front of you.
  • It needed to incorporate telephone and voice recognition requirements.

    What does telephone and voice recognition have to do with the keyboard? This 'requirement' seems a bit out of place to me....
  • I need a new ergonomic keyboard, a split keyboard. I am considering Logitech's Cordless Freedom Pro [logitech.com]. Any experience with this? Any chance of Logitech coming out with a new ergonomic keyboard soon? Suggestions for competitor keyboards? Trying to stay below $100. Thanks
    • I picked up one of these keyboards a while ago.

      Overall, I've been quite pleased. The general feel and construction of the keyboard are good - it's nice and solid, feels well made, and the tactile feel and "clicky-ness" (not much at all) is to my (admittedly personal) liking.

      My previous keyboard was a Microsoft Natural Elite (ergonomic), and I had very little difficulty switching to this one (one annoyance is the Home/End/Insert/Delete/PgUp/PgDown block above the inverted-T arrow keys is vertically oriented (similiar to the Elite) but with a slightly different arrangement than the Elite which throws me a off a bit from time to time (although actually I think Logitech's arrangement make more sense - the keys are arranged Home, End, (next row) Insert, Page Up, (next row) Delete, Page Down)). The wrist rest is nice, although I would prefer if it were more solidly attached (I got used to picking up my Elite by the wrist rest, which doesn't work out with the Logitech as it'll just come off. However, after a bit I just learned not to do that :P).

      I haven't played with the software for the function keys at all (No Linux version, but check out the Linux FunKeys patch for some support).

      The mouse is pretty good too. I was a bit reluctant on replacing my trusting Mouseman 97 (similar to the USB gaming mouse) - BEST MOUSE EVER. I've found it's pretty good, although it'd be nice if it were optical. The shape of it, how it sort of fits your hand, is rather comfortable, although I would prefer if it were less bulky. The (additional) middle mouse button on the side is a bit odd but useful when you get used to it. Sometimes I pick up the mouse and sort of use it as a remote when I'm reading a large web page, holding it above the table and just scrolling the wheel.

      As to the wireless. Overall, having wireless is rather snazzy. Sometimes I jack up the fonts sizes and recline in bed while I play games. I have a pretty small room, so I can't give you much on the range, but they don't claim more than 6 feet or so. One gripe - the docs say you should put the reciever 18 inches away from any other electronic equipment. Besides the fact there is not much space in my room that meets that suggestion, it's also hard to do since the cord for it is only about 3 feet long. Since I keep my computer under the desk, it's hard to get the reciever in an optimal position (I'm thinking of getting an extension cable and duct taping it to the ceiling or something). Also, occasionally (like maybe once every few days) it'll blip out for a few seconds and miss a few keystrokes/clicks whatever, but that's a minor thing.

      An interesting thing about the wireless - if you take a look at both the keyboard and mouse as well as the reciever, there's a small "connect" button that you use when you first set them up (assumedly to pick a transmission key or frequency or something). I noticed at the store there was the same sort of button on the wireless optical mouse they had. So if you prefer the optical mouse, it looks like there's a good chance it will interoperate with this system, but that's just an educated guess.

      Speaking of the reciever, the cable comes out to USB plugs. There are also adapters included to use it for PS/2 style ports (for both mouse and keyboard). Interestingly enough, although it says it'll work fine on any USB system (PC or Mac), it recommends you use the PS/2 adapters on PC. I have taken this device to heart and so I can't give you any info on using them USB under Linux or anything. The adapters worked just fine (even when I used them on my old pc - the keyboard was going USB -> PS/2 -> AT).

      So all in all, I would recommend this keyboard. It's comfortable to type, well made and very convienent from the wireless angle. The price did turn me off a bit, but I'm glad I went for it
    • You don't have to go that expensive. I baught this cheap no-name IR keyboard, it's black, has good battery life, you don't really have to aim it(unless the batteries are really low), and best of all it has a laptop keyboard layout and integrated mouse(Not like thinkpad).
      The pointing stick is horrible for graphics work, and things like that, but with an extra (normal) mouse hooked up, no worries. It's more than adequate for zooming around your desktop and copy/paste.
      As for the laptop style keyboard, well, alot of people hate them, but I love them. I consider them the most ergonomic keyboards made. Think about it, the keys are close together, and don't travel as far. This means you have to move less. My wrists havn't hurt since I started using it.
      My only gripe about this thing is that it lacks a third button on it's pointing device. This can be worked around, of course..
      You can get these things just about anywhere for ~$50(US). If you are hardcore(using computer for 10+hour days), 2 sets of rechargable batteries are also a good investment. Or you can just mod it and put a power jack in it.. sure it's not 100% cordless, but you can unplug and walk around any time :)
  • The name of that site should be bootlegGear.com. Who buys that crap?

  • Gah! (Score:3, Informative)

    by FFFish ( 7567 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @09:40PM (#2339465) Homepage
    "Fundamentally, it is a pyramidal design with two edges rounded to accommodate and orientate the palms of the user's hands."

    WTF do people have to make up words like "orientate" when perfectly servicable words (like "orient") already exist?

    • Re:Gah! (Score:2)

      by Pope ( 17780 )
      The same who say "utilize" instead of "use," or "impact" instead of "affect," or "collateral damage" instead of "dead civilians."

    • Re:Gah! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by D Anderson n'Swaart ( 453234 )
      I don't mean to make you sound silly, but if you had only checked a dictionary [dictionary.com] before posting that Usian-skewed comment, you would have noticed that "orientate" is the original British spelling of what is now spelled, in the US at least, as "orient". What I find is kinda useful, if you can be stuffed (which to be honest I usually can't) is writing your posts in Word or StarOffice, and pasting them in. That way, not only would you have noticed that "orientate" isn't underlined red, but you'd also have realised that you spelled "serviceable" incorrectly.

      Btw, sorry if this sounds flamey; I don't mean it that way...I guess being a novelist from South Africa I got a bit peeved that your comment was rated funny ;) Keep in mind that the article is on a site with a Russian TLD (.ru).

  • For all the Illuminati wannabe among us.
  • heh, sould learn some augmented or dim 7th cords, better yet augmented 6th then do some funky cirle 5ths progressions mixed in, if u are into tonality, whihc im not, hehe
  • Pyramid Shaped Keyboard, followed by the (hardware) Nut. Yeah, a nut, that's who comes up with such things...


    I work with someone who had an 'ergonomic' keyboard, and he makes as many typos with either keyboard, tho probably more with the 'ergo' keyboard.


    Maybe a Dvorak pyramid shaped keyboard, yeah... that's the ticket.

    • Dvorak doesn't magically make you better at hand coordination. =)

      Regardless of how well you type, a dvorak keyboard does feel more comfortable; whether it actually improves your typing is still a subject of much debate, but it does seem to help me some, comfort-wise.

  • can I get it on thinkgeek [thinkgeek.com]? But seriously it looks pretty cool. I'd like to try one out and see how easy it is to use.
  • Can you imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these?


    TWAJS [everything2.com]

  • It's about a company using a high-powered laser set-up to remove gum from pavements. More interesting. BTW, surely that's a tetrahedron rather than a pyramid?

  • Seriously, this keyboard looks like it would put a serious damper on any onehanded typing.

  • Nit (Score:2)

    by kreyg ( 103130 )
    Looks more like a tetrahedron than a pyramid to me...
  • Looks like bad sci-fi from Lost in Space, or Quantum Leap.

  • The keys you don't need.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by heliocentric ( 74613 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:14PM (#2339563) Homepage Journal
    The first question that arises is how one can duplicate 101 keys that are on today's computer keyboards with the 24 finger key locations (3-way for 4 fingers of each hand) on the ISOS keyboard . The answer is you don't want to.

    First time I saw that I thought they were going to get rid of lesser used characters completely... But then I realized they probably would have had to say it like this:

    The irst uestion that arises is ho one can dulicate 101 keys that are on todas comuter keboards with the 24 inger ke locations (3-way or 4 ingers o each hand) on the ISOS keboard. The answer is ou dont ant to.
    • The first question that arises is how one can duplicate 101 keys that are on today's computer keyboards with the 24 finger key locations (3-way for 4 fingers of each hand) on the ISOS keyboard . The answer is you don't want to.

      No, no, clearly the best and easiest solution is to redefine the English alphabet to have only 24 letters.

      That waiee, eau can be laisie with ehour taiping skills, and never confuse eheour children with the "Sometimes Whai" rule.
      • Heh. That reminds me:
        A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
        by Mark Twain

        For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.

        Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli.

        Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.

        This has been a shameless attempt at getting undeserved karma by posting other people's work.

      • I whipped up with a slightly more phoenetic alphabet for English a while back. Got rid of letters whose sounds were made by others (c, x, q, y), added letters for the 'sh', 'ng', 'ch' sounds and different vowel pronunciations (3 for the letter 'a'!), changed how others work (j used for the soft, g for the hard) and the like. Looked freaky in writing but would probably be worlds easier to learn. With the extras, it came to something like 30 letters. And of course you'd end lumping all like-pronounced words with the same spelling (pair, pare, pear), but that's just 'tû fki bd'.

        I've no doubt it's been done elsewhere by someone with better motivations than having an hour to kill, though.
  • Slashdot
    News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.

    Lawnmower with internet access [zzz.com.ru]

    Monocycle @ 100 MPH [zzz.com.ru]

    /dev/razor [zzz.com.ru]

    Taco's new desk [zzz.com.ru]

    Power generating boots [zzz.com.ru]

    Back to the Future board [zzz.com.ru]

    etc.

  • Cool, but I'd rather have... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by neuromortis ( 161690 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:18PM (#2339571) Homepage Journal

    ...tip sets, like those found in William Gibson novels. As long as we're switching to a different way of talking to our boxes, why not make it something that's a lot more portable and flexible? Yeah, the new interface would be a bit of bitch to learn (now just what gesture do I do for 'q'?), but I think that you could do a lot with a system like this.

    For example, the keyboard and the mouse could become the same unit. This would probably be the easiest part of the new interface to learn; after all, how hard is it to point? Even if it was more complicated than that I would be happy to figure it out if it would keep me from having to do that annoying keyboard-mouse-keyboard switch that some programs require.

    As for the learning problem in general, we already have keyboarding classes. They'd just have to start teaching the new tech (tip sets) over the old (keyboards). The new generation would laugh at the old until we and our ridiculous habits died out and then keyboarding would join the ranks of punch cards and paper terminals.

    Why do I think that tip-sets would be better than your trusty keyboard? Well, what I'm thinking of is gaming. You can go from one game to another and (usually) not have to think about what button does what. Somehow the concept of "My guy needs to jump now." goes straight from your mind to your hands, without passing through any state of "So what button is jump?". I would think that a well-engineered gesture-system would be the same thing. The letters that you wish to enter would go straight from mind to hands. Not that the keyboard doesn't do the same thing, but if your hands are shifted over a bit you'll get all screwed up, whereas the tip-sets are wherever your hands are. You could "type" with your hands lying by your sides or behind your head or whatever. You could also control the mouse pointer from this position, though who knows: maybe tip-sets would bring about an interface that didn't involve a pointer. (Nah.) Also, it would bring us one step closer to a VR environment, something that I believe has a certain amount of potential; especially given the graphics power of today's computers.

    Okay, I'm beginning to ramble but the bottom line is that tip-sets are cool and probably more efficient and ergonomic than keyboards and mice.

    ----------
    OpenNIC [unrated.net]. Because it's just better, that's why.

  • ...I've often wanted a chair that had a keyboard in each armrest, the left & right sides of a standard keyboard, yet you just move your fingers vertically for the upper and lower rows, or press down for the home row. I doubt anyone could learn it that knows how to hunt and peck, but us touch typists that go 120 wpm could benefit from it after you get used to it.

    Who knows, maybe one day will figure out a way, but I just don't see voice replacing typing, many people can type faster than they talk.
  • I'm gonna say what everyone is thinking:

    How do I play ?

    -- Dan =)

  • False Authority Syndrome at work. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Chmarr ( 18662 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:38PM (#2339619)
    The century old conventional Qwerty (look at first five characters on the upper left of your keyboard) layout was intentionally designed to slow down typist on the original mechanical designs. The logical way to accomplish that goal was to place characters in locations that stressed the operator's hands, forcing them to slow down.

    That is such rubbish. Not only are there six characters in 'QWERTY', but the original layout was not meant to slow down the typist, but to reduce the chance that two letters next to each other in a word would require that two keys next to each other on the keyboard (as viewed from the 'piano keys with the letters raised on them's point of view) be struck, thus increasing the chance of a jam.

    So, in fact, the querty layout was designed to speed up typing, by requiring less of an artificial pause between keystrokes.

    • References:

      http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/jcb/Dvorak/
      http://www.kith.org/logos/words/upper/Q.html
      http://krib.net/swateam/mag/journal.cgi?folder=S wa t40&next=3

      Contrary References:

      http://eh.net/lists/archives/eh.res/aug-1997/001 4. php
      http://www.wizzard.com/revolutions/obfuscation/Q WE RTY.html (not what you think, this one :)

      Interesting references to Querty keyboard for other topics:

      http://www.independent.org/tii/content/op_ed/ali eb ma.html
    • Thus slowing down the typist. True, it did speed up typing by preventing jams, however with the advent of computer keyboards that is no longer necessary. Therefore, the QWERTY keyboard slows down typists and must be eliminated.
    • the original layout was not meant to slow down the typist, but to reduce the chance that two letters next to each other in a word

      The speed of a typist is pretty inversly related to the distance between keys. If the keys are far apart, then you hit them slower. So, yeah, designing a layout to move the keys farther apart is designing a layout to slow you down.

      So, in fact, the querty layout was designed to speed up typing, by requiring less of an artificial pause between keystrokes.

      You're confusing yourself. The user is as slow as the keyboard needs, so the keyboard doesn't need to impose an artificial pause. If the keyboard doesn't need to cripple the user, it's because the user's already as crippled as necessary.
  • Imagine if you will trying to be the marketers of such a device! This odd-looking device that is suppose to be a good source of ergonomics and make more use of the thumbs. Even so, I know of a few reasons why it won't take off:

    1) People are reluctant to change. Most people have already adapted to the QWERTY-style of keyboard because it's the most common, and I'm sure those who like and can find a DVORAK keyboard use them as well.

    2) Gamers won't be pleased to have something that would restrict the use of other devices... those that don't use a joystick are likely to be using the keyboard, the mouse, or the combonation of the two, as in Quake (duh. btw, if you find someone that uses a joystick with Quake, hit them with a newspaper and rub their noses into the joystick and go "Noooooo..." See if they stop :-)

    3) Training costs of having to teach *each* person that you stick this keyboard with -- of course if a computer is *down* and this keyboard is the only one available, you can't expect them to know how to switch keyboards; so it makes sence to the PHBs out there that you should train them all... that takes time and money.

    Anyway, my $0.02

  • Kinesis keyboards (Score:3, Insightful)

    by legLess ( 127550 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:44PM (#2339631) Journal
    I've got a Kinesis [kinesis-ergo.com] Contoured [kinesis-ergo.com] 'board at work now, but I'm going to return it.

    First, the good: Learning the new key positions wasn't very difficult. They're pretty natural, and the hand position is very nice. Less stress than a standard 'board. The keys themselves are mechanical, not membrane, and low-pressure. Very nice feel, very positive contact, although not much of a click. There's an audible click that you can toggle.

    On the bad side, the 'board is almost useless except for typing characters. The control (shift, alt, etc) keys are in difficult positions. A design goal of the 'board, they tell me, was to make key combos like 'CTRL-SHIFT-S' easier to hit with two hands. This may be better for your hands, but at high speed it's very very hard to coordinate two hands to nail a combo like this (and I play guitar, so I know a little about coordinating hand movements).

    There's no numeric keypad, but there is another 'layer' that can be toggled with a function key or foot switch. Kind of a pain. The 'board's programmable, if you spring $50 for the extra chip (with that and the footswitch, you're easily over $300), and this helps a little, but not enough.

    Bottom line for me: the keys feel beautiful and typing characters is very easy, but the 'board's nearly useless for anything else. It's hard to hit function keys and key combos, hard to use with one hand while keeping a hand on the mouse - in other words, nearly half of what I do. Too bad.

    BUT if you do nothing but type all day, buy this board and never let it out of your sight. Your life will improve dramatically. If I could afford to have 2 'boards, this would be one of them.
    • I agree, the default positions for the control and alt keys are idiotically. IMO, the programable version is a must so you can remap them. The way my thumb works, I like to switch control with delete and alt with end; this puts all the meta keys in easy reach of my left hand. With this change, you're home free.

      With this proviso, I'd recommend the Kinesis to anybody who needs to type more than a few hours a day, and who can afford a day or two of accomodation time.

      (I've never the tried the foot switch and my work seldom requires the numeric keypad. YMMV.)
    • I have a classic (one for home one for work actually) and I've been using it for roughly two years now. I really like it. At first, yeah, those combos were a pain, then I decided that they key placement wasn't ideal so I just remapped stuff until I could cope. Hardware remapping is a beautiful thing. The first thing to go was Caps Lock, replaced by ctrl. Once that was done I just about didn't need anything else, combos were a cinch. Note - I use vi. Emacs users would probably have to take further actions if they found the positioning of the other keys inconvenient.

      The biggest problem I have with the kinesis is that the firmware is buggy and modes stick. Evidently Kinesis claims this its not the firmware (some of the ergo sites have discussion boards, see those for more details) but I'm pretty sure they're wrong. The revision I have on both of my Kinesis Classics is "$copyright 1986 - 1999 by interfatron-bbc, ltd., rev 2.48a 03/06/99" (hold down both shift keys and press F12 to dump the revision) and occasinally "shift" sticks and I end up typing in all caps without realizing it, pressing shift again (either one) fixes the problem. I'd say it happens about once a day, maybe twice during good use. Now a co-worker of mine bought a Kinesis MPC (has a Macintosh ADB adapter or something IIRC) he had a different firmware revision in his and for him the control key "stuck" once per day or so. If you are thinking about getting a Kinesis (this bug aside I really do like them) don't be surprised when you run into this. Throwing down $200-$300 for a keyboard with a buggy firmware definately isn't for everyone.

  • sharp, searing pain (Score:3, Funny)

    by Daspek ( 132130 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:45PM (#2339632)
    man, that's pointy. gone now are the days when we could bash our heads into our keyboards in frustration when 'hello world' didn't compile right.

  • MAKE.TEXT.FAST (Score:3, Funny)

    by xixax ( 44677 ) on Sunday September 23, 2001 @10:47PM (#2339634)
    With this simple pyramid keyboard scheme, you can type not twice as fast, not ten times as fast, but MORE THAN ONE MILLION TIMES as fast as you do now. Do you know what 1 million score -1 Slashdot posts look like? It's amazing!

    How does it work? For every key that you press, you will get back DOUBLE THAT NUMBER of AOL "Me too!" posts, greatly expanding your word count by including numerous un-edited follow-ups WITHOUT YOU HAVING TO LIFT A FINGER!

    Simply copy this post to 10 of your closest friends, and ask them to follow you up on Slashdot, quoting your post in total and asking them to do the same to their ten closest friends...

    (you get the idea)

    Xix.
  • If you're already hitting multiple keys to generate a single 'key press', how do you go about doing multiple 'key press' combinations?

    Of course Windows users will love the fact that they can customize the key settings and bind an extended middle finger to Control-Alt-Delete.
  • Commander, you really should try out a Kinesis... I got my first about a decade ago when tendonitis threatened to keep me from working. It was a fortune ($700) and non-reimbursable but it was that or no more programming. I've got three now and each cost 1/2 what the previous one did. I kept working and the tendonitis never came back. I also custom-made a tilted stand for a Trackman Marble trackball since I found that mousing could cause as much pain as typing. (The newer Marble FX has much the same pronation-correcting effect.) I do miss a true numberpad on the Kinesis boards and the function keys are not great, but you'll get used to using your thumbs for the "meta" keys... and you can do Control-Alt-Delete with one hand!
  • i doubt many of you have been subjected to typing classes but i sat through 2 years of them at school. yep, two! (and this wasn't as long ago as you might think, i'm talking '91 here) so as you can imagine, my typing style is pretty good.

    i have my wrists high, i have my fingers at the correct angle over the 'home row', i can type numbers from there without having to lift off and go one fingered. repeat after me, 'a-s-d-f-j-k-l-;'

    alas, if only everyone was still subjected to typing classes on typewriters (no nasty backspace) we would all be able to type perfectly and wouldn't need these gimmicky and stupid devices that other employees would either a) steal or b) laugh at.
  • I don't see it here, so I thought I'd give a link to the U.S. Patent [uspto.gov] that has been awarded for this keyboard. A wealth on information there for anyone curious for more details on how it would word.

    One of the odd details in the patent is that they also intend for it to function as a telephone dialing pad, so you can dial your phone without removing your hands from the keyboard. I guess they are interested in the secretary/telemarketer market here...

  • I still use the same 102-key keyboard that was once upon a time connected to my first IBM-compatible PC back in 1989. Maybe I'm just nostalgic, but then again I've never found another keyboard in today's market that seems to have the same kind of feel and feedback. Today's keyboards feel so mushy and haven't got the kind of click this keyboard does.

    By the way, the article perpetuates the myth that the QWERTY keyboard was designed to slow typists down. It wasn't. It was designed to prevent the original mechanical typewriters from jamming. You can type as fast as you like on a QUERTY...

  • ...will stay fresh under it for weeks.

    Put your razor blades under it at night, they will be sharp in the morning!

    Chip
  • Damn Illuminati! First they make this keyboard, and then the lameness filter tries to stop this post from getting through.

    Whats next, a national ID card?


  • OFF TOPIC, but on the same page as the keyboard!!

    scroll down all the way to the botom or here is the link:

    http://zzz.com.ru/pic98.jpg

    It is the triangle problem and to stop many of you from banging your head here is the solution:

    The top image is not a triangle... The red and dark green triangle do not form a straight lines and there slopes are different the what should be the slope of the large triangle. The top image is "concave down" while the bottom image is "concave up" The area of the slope when added up makes 1, thus where the box comes from.
  • I always thought that the keyboard would lead to wrist/arm pain, but strangely enough, it hasnt. (I got one of those curvy Microsoft deals, and it's sweet.) The mouse arm is now starting to hurt! I leave it perched up on the desk for long periods of time, with very little movement (reading something long, or watching porn) and now I got all kinds of pain. Shooting pains, elbow pains, wrist pains... I think I need to try something before it gets serious.

  • All of the stated advantages regarding corded keyboards are totally true, unfortunatly, there is the difficulty of training.

    What should the chords be? Is it possible for all different types of corded keyboards to use the same chord to produce the same character? If not (which is the likely case), how many different sets of cords will someone have to learn?

    With a traditional one character one key approach someone who has never typed before can be given a keyboard and can pound out a document. With a chorded approach, first a person must sit down and practice the chords. In order to type with any profeciency, one must practice long enough that the chords become part of muscle memory.

    Furthermore, some of the corded designs, like the pyramid, would seem to accomidate only one handsize. It would be easy to make several sizes of keyboard, but each person would have to carry around their own keyboard.

    The flat arrangement isn't going away any time soon. The QWERTY arrangement might not stay, and 'ergonomic' keyboards based on a flat arrangement are going to become more common, but going to chorded keyboards isn't likely to happen for the general populace because of the extreme amount of training required to operate one.

    I have seen other arguments here that it isn't hard to learn DVORAK, so it shouldn't be hard to learn chording, but that's ignoring the most basic and obvious difference. If I can't remember where a particular key is, I can look. If I can't remember a particular chord, I need to look it up. In other words I need something seperate from the (read easily lost) pasted somewhere so I can use the thing. On the other hand If I were placed on a DVORAK keyboard right now I could still post this message. I would just have to use the hunt and peck method rather than the method that I currently use, which is a rather nonstandard form of touch typing, and the occasional look at the hands.

  • Alter the applications when changing the keys! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by olla podriga ( 523728 ) on Monday September 24, 2001 @05:42AM (#2340334)
    Ever thought about that most software was designed for the qwerty-layout? (think about some emacs shortcuts...)

    So switching to another layout comes with a double effort: you have to learn new letter positions (for typing) and even more annoying the key-combos (CTRL-C, CTRL-A, CTRL-E...) aren't where they feel right.
  • The pyramid design is extremely symbolic... of something that was so impossibly & hideously expensive on resources, it was abandoned within a single dynasty.


    We see this same symbolism today. Pyramid schemes, for example, which (like their Egyptian counterparts) look impressive to the untrained eye, but really just holds some decomposing remains.


    The Great Glass Pyramid of Stockport is the HQ of a bank that can be sure of sharp razor blades, even if they can't be sure of sharp management. About the only redeeming feature of what Prince Charles almost certainly sees as a "monsterous carbuncle" is that nobody is going to bother flying an aircraft into it, making it perhaps one of the safest structures in the world, right now.


    Finally, we come to the pyramid keyboard. Invented by Rubix, this device is intended to befuddle, confuse and mystify, and offer hours of frustration. Well, almost. Like all pyramids, it will survive only because of a total lack of wear & tear. As designs go, the only keyboard I've ever used that comes even close to being as unusable & impractical is the Sinclair spongy keypads of the ZX80 & ZX81.

  • ...for unorthodox input devices like this.

Slashdot Top Deals

A committee takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom. -- Parkinson

Close